Alaska Workplace Harassment Laws: 1-Employee Rule, 300 Days (2026)

Workplace harassment is unlawful in Alaska as a form of employment discrimination, but the Alaska Human Rights Law never uses the word. AS 18.80.220(a)(1) makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person "in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment" because of a protected trait, and the Alaska Supreme Court has held that "discriminatory behavior sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and to create a discriminatory hostile work environment violates AS 18.80.220" (French v. Jadon, Inc., 911 P.2d 20 (Alaska 1996), as quoted in Veco, Inc. v. Rosebrock, 970 P.2d 906 (Alaska 1999)).

The law reaches employers of every size. AS 18.80.300(5) defines an employer as a person, including the state and its political subdivisions, "who has one or more employees in the state," with an exclusion for certain nonprofit clubs and associations. For other states, see workplace harassment laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-20. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Alaska state law on workplace harassment by employers, supervisors and coworkers under the Alaska Human Rights Law, AS 18.80 (chiefly AS 18.80.100-18.80.145 and 18.80.200-18.80.300), the Commission's filing rule in 6 AAC 30.230, and Alaska Supreme Court decisions applying AS 18.80.220. It does not cover wrongful firing or the full complaint and lawsuit procedure (see Alaska wrongful termination), damages estimates, criminal harassment or stalking prosecutions, harassment outside employment, or federal-employee procedure.

Alaska harassment rules at a glance

What Alaska law prohibits

The employment section of the Human Rights Law makes it unlawful for:

"an employer to refuse employment to a person, or to bar a person from employment, or to discriminate against a person in compensation or in a term, condition, or privilege of employment because of the person's race, religion, color, or national origin, or because of the person's age, physical or mental disability, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, or parenthood when the reasonable demands of the position do not require distinction on the basis of age, physical or mental disability, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, or parenthood" (AS 18.80.220(a)(1))

The Human Rights Law's employment and enforcement sections (AS 18.80.100-18.80.135 and 18.80.200-18.80.300) contain no definition of harassment, no hostile-environment standard and no statutory defense for employers. Harassment claims under Alaska law rest on the "term, condition, or privilege of employment" language and on how the Alaska Supreme Court has read it.

The hostile-environment test in Alaska case law

In Veco, Inc. v. Rosebrock, 970 P.2d 906 (Alaska 1999), the Alaska Supreme Court restated its earlier holding:

"In French, we held that 'discriminatory behavior sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and to create a discriminatory hostile work environment violates AS 18.80.220.'" (Veco, Inc. v. Rosebrock, 970 P.2d 906 (Alaska 1999), quoting French v. Jadon, Inc., 911 P.2d 20, 28 (Alaska 1996))

The same opinion explains how the court uses federal law. Alaska courts "have looked to federal Title VII cases for guidance," but the court has also observed that AS 18.80.220 "is intended to be more broadly interpreted than federal law to further the goal of eradication of discrimination" (quoting Wondzell v. Alaska Wood Prods., Inc., 601 P.2d 584, 585 (Alaska 1979)).

Which Alaska employers are covered

The definitions in AS 18.80.300 apply to the whole chapter:

"'employer' means a person, including the state and a political subdivision of the state, who has one or more employees in the state but does not include a club that is exclusively social, or a fraternal, charitable, educational, or religious association or corporation, if the club, association, or corporation is not organized for private profit" (AS 18.80.300(5))

Two limits follow from the text:

• Nonprofit exclusion: a club that is exclusively social, or a fraternal, charitable, educational or religious association or corporation, is outside the definition only "if the club, association, or corporation is not organized for private profit."
• Domestic service: an "employee" is "an individual employed by an employer but does not include an individual employed in the domestic service of any person" (AS 18.80.300(4)).

There is no separate, higher threshold for harassment; the one-employee definition is the one AS 18.80.220 uses. Federal Title VII, by comparison, defines an employer as a person with "fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year" (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b)); the federal layer is explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Protected traits in Alaska

AS 18.80.220(a)(1) lists:

• race, religion, color and national origin;
• age;
• physical or mental disability;
• sex;
• marital status and changes in marital status;
• pregnancy;
• parenthood.

Two textual details matter. First, "national origin" includes ancestry (AS 18.80.300(11)). Second, the age, disability, sex, marital-status, pregnancy and parenthood grounds apply "when the reasonable demands of the position do not require distinction" on that basis. AS 18.80.220 sets no minimum age for the age ground.

The list in AS 18.80.220(a)(1) does not name sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, hair texture or protective hairstyles, or military status.

The Alaska State Commission for Human Rights, which enforces AS 18.80, lists "Sexual Orientation / Gender Identity or 'expression'" among the bases it covers "in some instances," and its July 2022 briefing paper says the Commission "almost immediately began accepting LGBTQ+ employment discrimination cases" after the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bostock v. Clayton County in 2020, relying on the Title VII framework the Alaska Supreme Court applies to AS 18.80. A bill to add those classes to the law (HB 301, 34th Legislature) was not enacted; its last recorded status is the House Judiciary Committee on May 15, 2026. Anchorage's own ordinance names sexual orientation and gender identity or expression (see the filing section below).

Is the employer responsible? Can an individual be liable?

AS 18.80 has no statutory rule on employer liability for harassment. The Alaska Supreme Court set one out in Veco v. Rosebrock (1999). It held "that an employer is vicariously liable for the hostile work environment created by its supervisors regardless of whether management-level employees knew or should have known about the harassment, and regardless of whether the supervisors were acting within the scope of their employment," and said that even where the employer has a policy prohibiting sexual harassment and a procedure for employee complaints, "the employer will still have aided the supervisor in committing the harassment." The court then limited the rule:

"Thus, employers are only vicariously liable for hostile environment sexual harassment committed by the complainant's supervisor. These same principles apply to determine the scope of an employer's liability when its supervisors know about sexual harassment by a co-worker or by a supervisor who does not have authority over the complainant, but fail to take appropriate remedial action." (Veco, Inc. v. Rosebrock, 970 P.2d 906 (Alaska 1999))

The court noted the U.S. Supreme Court's 1998 Faragher and Ellerth decisions but said it had "no occasion to consider whether the affirmative defense which they announce should be adopted as a feature of Alaska anti-discrimination law." That rule is a 1999 statement about sexual harassment; the statute itself is silent on the point.

On individual liability, the Human Rights Law has an aiding-and-abetting section that runs against any "person":

"It is unlawful for a person to aid, abet, incite, compel, or coerce the doing of an act forbidden under this chapter or to attempt to do so." (AS 18.80.260)

AS 18.80.300(13) defines "person" to include "one or more individuals" and "employees," among others. By its text, then, AS 18.80.260 reaches an individual, including an employee, who aids, abets, incites, compels or coerces an act the chapter forbids. The main employment clause, AS 18.80.220(a)(1), runs against "an employer."

Retaliation for complaining

AS 18.80.220(a)(4) makes it unlawful for "an employer, labor organization, or employment agency to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against a person because the person has opposed any practices forbidden under AS 18.80.200 - 18.80.280 or because the person has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in a proceeding under this chapter." How a firing after a complaint fits with Alaska's default employment rule is covered on the Alaska at-will employment page.

Deadlines and where to file

The Alaska State Commission for Human Rights takes complaints under AS 18.80. A person aggrieved by a discriminatory practice "may sign and file with the commission a written, verified complaint stating the name and address of the person alleged to have engaged in the discriminatory practice, and the particulars of the discrimination" (AS 18.80.100(a)).

• Commission deadline: the statute states no deadline; the Commission's regulation does. A complaint about an act "not of a continuing nature must be filed no later than 300 days after the alleged discriminatory act or practice occurred," and one about a practice "of a continuing nature must be filed no later than 300 days after the alleged discriminatory act or practice stopped" (6 AAC 30.230(b)-(c)). There is no separate harassment deadline.
• Dismissal and other forums: a dismissal under AS 18.80.112 "does not prevent a complainant from (1) initiating an action or proceeding in another forum; or (2) filing a new complaint under AS 18.80.100 that resolves the grounds for the dismissal" (AS 18.80.112(d)).
• Court: "The superior court is the court of original jurisdiction over all causes of action arising under the provisions of AS 18.80. A person who is injured or aggrieved by an act, practice, or policy which is prohibited under AS 18.80 may apply to the superior court for relief" (AS 22.10.020(i)). AS 18.80 itself does not state a deadline for that suit. The Alaska Supreme Court has held that "under AS 09.10.070, claims based on AS 18.80 must be brought within two years of the offending conduct," and that the period was equitably tolled while a Commission proceeding was pending where the court claim sought relief the Commission could not award (Beegan v. State, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (Alaska 2008)).
• Court and Commission together: a plaintiff who sues under AS 22.10.020(i) "shall serve a copy of the complaint on the commission," which may intervene and, if it certifies that it is investigating or dealing with the same practice, may have the court defer the case; a Commission hearing decision reached in that period "is binding on the parties to the court action as to all issues resolved in the hearing" (AS 18.80.145(a)-(b)). Separately, an acquittal "by the commission or a court of competent jurisdiction" of an alleged violation of the chapter "is a bar to any other action, civil or criminal, based on the same act or omission" (AS 18.80.280), subject to AS 18.80.145(d) where the Commission does not intervene or hold a hearing.
• Local law (Anchorage): the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission enforces Anchorage Municipal Code Title 5, which covers employment; the Commission states that "it's illegal in Anchorage to discriminate based on race, color, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, marital status, age, or physical and mental disability." The EEOC's Seattle Field Office lists "180 days to file with the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission."
• Federal charge: the EEOC states that its "180 calendar day filing deadline is extended to 300 calendar days if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis," and that in harassment cases the charge is due within 180 or 300 days "of the last incident of harassment." The EEOC's Seattle Field Office states that "an individual has 300 days from the date of alleged harm to file a charge" against an employer with 15 or more employees for discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion or disability in Alaska (20 or more employees for age). Under 6 AAC 30.210(g), if the acts complained of also violate federal law, Commission staff give the appropriate federal agency a copy of the complaint "unless the complainant directs otherwise."

The Commission may not order "noneconomic or punitive damages in a case" (AS 18.80.130(a)), though the Alaska Supreme Court has held that "punitive damages are recoverable in discrimination cases" brought in superior court under AS 22.10.020(i) (Veco v. Rosebrock); remedies, the court route and the steps between complaint and suit are covered on the Alaska wrongful termination page, and the Alaska employment discrimination settlement calculator is an estimating tool, not a prediction of any outcome.

Does Alaska require harassment training or a written policy?

Not for private employers. The Human Rights Law's employment and enforcement sections (AS 18.80.100-18.80.135 and 18.80.200-18.80.300) and the Department of Labor chapters AS 23.05 and AS 23.10 contain no harassment-training, written-policy or posting requirement for private employers.

Training appears in AS 18.80 only as relief after a violation: in an employment case, the Commission "may order any appropriate relief," including "training of an employer, labor organization, or employment agency, and its employees concerning discriminatory practices" (AS 18.80.130(a)).

NDAs, confidentiality and arbitration

AS 18.80 and the labor chapters AS 23.05 and AS 23.10 contain no provision limiting nondisclosure or confidentiality terms in harassment agreements or settlements. Federal law adds limits for sexual harassment disputes: the Speak Out Act makes nondisclosure and nondisparagement clauses agreed to before a sexual harassment dispute arises judicially unenforceable where the conduct is alleged to violate federal, tribal or state law, and the Ending Forced Arbitration Act lets the person alleging sexual harassment elect court over a predispute arbitration agreement; both are explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Protective orders for stalking or sexual assault

Separate from the Human Rights Law, a person "who reasonably believes that the person is a victim of stalking or sexual assault that is not a crime involving domestic violence may file a petition in the district or superior court for a protective order against a respondent who is alleged to have committed the stalking or sexual assault" (AS 18.65.850(a)). The section is written for the person who is the victim; it is not an employer petition.

Is workplace bullying illegal in Alaska?

AS 18.80 reaches harassment because of the traits AS 18.80.220 lists. Neither AS 18.80 nor the labor chapters AS 23.05 and AS 23.10 contain a provision on general workplace bullying that is unconnected to those traits.

Documenting harassment and workplace monitoring

The rules on recording a conversation at work, including one with a harasser, are on the Alaska workplace recording laws page. Employer monitoring of email, devices and workspaces is covered on the Alaska employee monitoring laws page.

Related pages

• Workplace harassment laws by state
• Alaska wrongful termination
• Alaska at-will employment laws
• Alaska employee monitoring laws
• Alaska workplace recording laws

This article provides general legal information about Alaska workplace harassment law under the Alaska Human Rights Law, AS 18.80, as of 2026-10-20. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Alaska or the Alaska State Commission for Human Rights.

Last updated: 2026-10-20.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is workplace harassment illegal in Alaska?

Harassment because of a protected trait is unlawful as employment discrimination under AS 18.80.220(a)(1), which bars discrimination in a term, condition, or privilege of employment. The Alaska Supreme Court has held that discriminatory behavior sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create a hostile work environment violates AS 18.80.220.

Does Alaska harassment law apply to small employers?

Yes. AS 18.80.300(5) defines an employer as a person, including the state and political subdivisions, with one or more employees in the state. A club that is exclusively social, or a fraternal, charitable, educational or religious association or corporation, is excluded if it is not organized for private profit, and domestic-service workers are not employees under AS 18.80.300(4).

How long do I have to file a harassment complaint in Alaska?

Under 6 AAC 30.230, a complaint to the Alaska State Commission for Human Rights must be filed no later than 300 days after the alleged discriminatory act, or 300 days after a continuing practice stopped. AS 22.10.020(i) also lets an aggrieved person apply to the superior court for relief, and the Alaska Supreme Court has held that AS 18.80 claims in court must be brought within two years of the offending conduct under AS 09.10.070, with tolling recognized while a Commission proceeding was pending (Beegan, 2008).

Is my employer responsible for harassment by a coworker in Alaska?

AS 18.80 does not say. In Veco, Inc. v. Rosebrock (1999), the Alaska Supreme Court held employers vicariously liable for hostile-environment sexual harassment by the complainant's supervisor, regardless of whether management knew of it and even where the employer had an anti-harassment policy, and tied liability for coworker harassment to whether the employer's supervisors knew of it and failed to take appropriate remedial action.

Does Alaska law protect sexual orientation or gender identity at work?

AS 18.80.220(a)(1) does not list sexual orientation or gender identity. Its listed traits are race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental disability, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy and parenthood. The Alaska State Commission for Human Rights lists sexual orientation and gender identity or expression among the bases it covers in some instances, and its 2022 briefing paper says it began accepting LGBTQ+ employment discrimination cases after the 2020 Bostock decision. HB 301, a bill to write those classes into the law, was not enacted. In Anchorage, the municipal anti-discrimination law names sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

Does Alaska require sexual harassment training for private employers?

The employment and enforcement sections of AS 18.80 contain no training or written-policy requirement for private employers. The Commission may order training of an employer and its employees as relief in an employment case under AS 18.80.130(a).

Is retaliation for reporting harassment illegal in Alaska?

AS 18.80.220(a)(4) makes it unlawful for an employer, labor organization or employment agency to discharge, expel or otherwise discriminate against a person for opposing practices forbidden by AS 18.80.200-18.80.280 or for filing a complaint, testifying or assisting in a proceeding under the chapter.